Synopsis: The movie begins in 1882,with the death of Andres Bonifacio’s wife, and his awakening to the injustices being perpetrated by the Spanish. It then skips ahead to 1896, just as the existence of the Katipunan has been revealed to authorities. With Bonifacio as leader, the movement is forced to go into battle. Bonifacio leads a small, untrained, poorly armed force on a march to Manila, hoping to lay siege on the walled city of Intramuros with the help of comrades from other provinces. (Click the City)

MTRCB Rating: R-13

Trailer:

Reviews:

4.5 Mario Bautista (Showbiz Portal)

“You’d surely just be blown away by Alfred Vargas stunning performance in the title role.” (Read full review)

3.5 Philbert Dy (Click the City)

“As a film, it comes off as a bit stiff, perhaps a little too concerned about coming off epic. But in moments, it finds the blood of the character, and it lets it run.” (Read full review)

3.5 Skilty Labastilla (Young Critics Circle)

“A generation of high school students will remember Alfred Vargas as Bonifacio when Supremo will be made required viewing in schools across the country.” (Read full review)

3.0 Oggs Cruz (Twitch)

“Supremo suffers because it is essentially a lesson in Philippine history told through moving pictures. It shows Somes as a very able craftsman, creating something near-grand with no budget. I just wish he invested more than just crafsmanship.”

3.0 Anton Dulce (radulce.wordpress)

“The movie’s redemption is how it forces the average movie goer to take a long, hard, and shocking look at what transpired more than a century ago.” (Read full review)

2.75 Jay Rosas (Cinephiles)

“There were some good moments in there, good intention, but never really quite got there. There were sloppy acting and execution. I believe the film, how it was titled as Supremo, wanted to venerate Bonifacio’s heroism, remind the students and then-students of the hero’s role in Philippine independence, but it didn’t really come through. I like how the light moments (‘Mabuhay ang utot ng bayan!’) were humanistic but juxtaposed with the theme the film wanted to achieve, parang it presents the folly, not the furor of the revolution. There’s passion in Vargas’ performance still but inconsistent and forced, unlike his other Andres in Paglilitis.”

2.0 Nico Quejano (Cinephiles)

“It was under researched, overwritten and over scored. This is Andres Bonifacio’s life told through Hollywood’s eyes. The historical embellishments would even embarrass Carlo J. Caparas. And the actors didn’t help, you have a very serious Jacinto, a robotic Aguinaldo and an overemotional Bonifacio. (No wonder he never won a battle).”

2.0 Jason Paul Laxamana (Cinephiles)

“I couldn’t feel empathy (Andres was very stiff, very textbook) with nor honor (I felt that Andres didn’t exude the greatness I was hoping for) for Andres’ portrayal here. and the story is all over the place. It could have been episodic, but if indeed it was, episodes must have been made interesting enough to keep me interested. As much as I love Somes’ production design, I have observed that I do not like the way he treats his action sequences (from Ishmael, Mariposa, and now this).”

1.5 Stephanie Mayo (Films and Events Check)

“The shockingly bad, highly amateurish and self-conscious performance of the cast makes the entire film feel fake.” (Read full review)